Poll: are you having/had whooping cough vaccine?

[Tea1Sugar]

I know it's an individual choice so I'm not asking for people's reasoning. I'm 34 weeks with dc2, never offered to me with dc1 so can't decide. I've read all the press and literature on it and still undecided. So just wondering how many women are actually taking it up.

Thought I'd try a bit of a poll. Yes or no?

Patsy im prepared to give my baby ibuprofen and all sorts of other medication that they might need once they are born, that doesnt mean I will give it to them when they are in my womb. Its not as simple as not wanting it for myself.

Nope.

seff, you said, "Is it a proven fact that babies whose mothers get vaccinated in pregnancy are immune from WC? Does that mean they don't need to be vaccinated against WC at 8 weeks?"

(Wish there was some decent way of quoting people on here!)

The idea behind it is that most adults' immunity of whooping cough is waning. In adults, doctors are seeing more of it but it isn't really a serious illness in adults.

If you vaccinate a pregnant women, you reduce her chances of getting WC and then breathing WC germs all over her newborn baby AND you give the baby some passive immunity via the mother so the chances of the baby catching it are reduced, and so hopefully reducing their chances of getting very sick or dying from WC.

Passive immunity 'runs out' in the first few months, which is why it is important to have the baby themselves vaccinated when their immune system is doing things on its own.

ONLYMYDOG- you say you were given the vaccine at 13w. It should only be offered to women once they are 28 weeks pregnant. I am a practice nurse. I would check out exactly what you were given and why!!!

Nope, they seem far too keen to inject stuff into us these days!

Thanks dinosnores

So, the injection is given to pregnant women more to prevent them from catching it, as a newborn is more likely to catch it from it's mother?

Passive immunity is something that interests me, as a long term breastfeeder. I've only ever read conflicting information about how immunity is passed from mother to baby (whether through pregnancy or through breastfeeding). Anecdotally, my DD is nearly 4 and still breastfed, and has never caught chicken pox, despite having contact with it more than once. Could be a coincidence, could have caught a mild case, may have immunity whilst breastfeeding.

But that's a whole other conversation! It's not easy to find information on vaccinations that isn't from either pro vaxers or anti vaxers.

In terms of the WC vaccine for pregnant women, it annoys me that we're mainly told "have the injection because it protects your baby" without being told more details about HOW it protects your baby.

Thanks again :)

Yes, at 28 weeks.

That fear factor annoys me too seff. They drill parental guilt into you whilst pregnant. If they completely told us the truth at every turn, I would take all the advice given. However I was told by 3 different health professionals that the mmr is '100% safe' and things like that make me do my own research rather than just listen to what I'm told. I got the mmr for ds in the end but it sure as hell is not 100% safe!

Incidentally, I'm 33 And was formula fed and have never had chicken pox, despite both my breastfed siblings having it . I run a mile when I hear somebody has it though!

Yes, at 31 ish weeks.

The argument against getting it "only 12 babies died from whooping cough last year so it's not that big a risk" is odd. How many babies died because their mothers were vaccinated? None that I'm aware of

In answer to an earlier question (no time to quote, sorry!) the theory behind the protection of the vaccination is two fold - firstly it protects the mother so that she can't pass it on, but it also thought that some of the antibodies will pass to the baby transplacentally. This wouldn't be enough to give full immunity and so the baby will still need the full course once born, but the hope is that just enough will pass over to protect the baby in the early months. Early studies suggest that some protection is carried over as suspected, but this is still being monitored by the MHRA and there are no published UK data as yet (I'm trying to get hold of what they have thus far via FOI request, but I don't know if they'll give it to me!). There is a further complication in that, according to the Repavax package insert, women who never had the whooping cough vaccine or disease as children (like me due to the scandal at the time) won't produce antibodies very efficiently, as the vaccine offered is just a booster and the levels of antigens aren't high enough for a full immune response. In these cases the protection that the baby got from the mother would be expected to be lower. I don't think this is mentioned anywhere in the NHS literature and so even midwives etc may not be aware, but the simplistic way this has been put across is a whole other conversation!

In answer to PostmanPatAlwaysRingsTwice, for me the "only 12 babies" argument relates to how rare the disease is, and therefore whether it's worth taking the risk of the vaccine while pregnant. It's being presented as risk-free by all the HCPs I've spoken to, but as this thread shows it's a little more complicated than that.

I had it at 30ish weeks,
My baby is nearly six months old now and we had no side effects.

I was last pregnant in 2011 and was advised to have the whooping cough booster as soon as I gave birth (in France). I didn't realise the advice had changed.

I am pregnant again should I be looking into re-vaccination to help this baby's immunity?

My friend got whooping cough while pregnant with twins and nearly lost them because of it.

"as this thread shows it's a little more complicated than that."

This thread has shown that some people are suspicious of it, that's all. Like all the thousands of vaccination threads on here. Nobody has given any sound reasons for not having it.

12 dead babies showing whooping cough is low risk... Again, maybe you feel that's not many but it's 12 times as many as have died from their mothers getting the vaccine.

With respect, it is a complicated issue as the use of the vaccine in this way is new and nothing is known about long term effects. The NHS official line doesn't reflect any of the uncertainty as it's designed primarily to reassure patients. It might be fine, but it's too early to say that. Epidemiological data is messy and you need a heck of a lot of it for any more subtle effects to become apparent.

This topic obviously gets backs up on both sides of the debate, but you need to recognise that this a judgement call. You might not consider the uncertainty to be a good reason to hold back, but not everyone thinks that way. As I said earlier, I respect anyone who makes either decision as it's a difficult call.

Great post Kate! There's a lot of bullying and guilt when it comes to vaccinations and it's completely unnecessary!

HelenHen I haven't seen any bullying but why do you think it's completely unnecessary to encourage people to be vaccinated? Do you know anything about the subject other than 'they seem far too keen to inject stuff into us these days' which is a rather silly statement.

BBC article with quotes from vaccine committee and various other experts here

Postman i believe there is some bullying and guilt also. Here in Dublin the HSE (our version of the NHS) have ad campaigns about it and you are really pressurised into it- by the midwives moreso than the consultants (our care is about 50% private / consultant led). Yet a baby has not died of WC in Ireland for 8 yrs or something like that (albeit with a much smaller population than the UK, obviously). 2 babies have died since 2001 afaik. THAT SAID, i still am of the opinion the vaccine is absolutely fine- i just took the choice not to get it, i've learned to trust my gut over the yrs and it's yet to let me down. i sincerely hope this time it doesnt either. I have yet to thoroughly research the vaccines he will get at 4 mths- i'm sure i'll follow most of the proposed schedule, but i believe there are 1 or 2 that you can refuse as they are not necessary. I have a lot more research to do first though.

I agree with Helen that people are far too laissez faire about injections- absolutely i do- there simply arent enough long term studies proving they are as safe as the HSE/NHS claim they are.

I fully respect anyone who got/gets the vaccine, it just wasnt my choice. I've been blessed with amazing health all my life (for eg i've never ever had the flu) so i do wonder did that affect my decision- had i been a very sick child or adult i'm sure i'd've happily taken any injection going.

I think vaccinations are most likely a good thing for the world, as a whole, just not necessarily me personally And my own private circumstances! I fully respect anyone's decisions to get or not get and I wish others would do the same! It should not be presumed that people will get them... It is a choice after all. Parents should be asked and, if they decline, that should be accepted.

I'm another one who goes with my gut and if something seems unnecessary or wrong for me, why would I simply follow the herd?

I think what annoys me most is that, after vaccinations, if there is any problem, this information does not seem to be recorded anywhere and yet figures are thrown about left, right and centre. I simply don't trust where these figures have come from.

Yep, I'm getting it as soon as I start maternity leave at 36/37 weeks

I think I will. I'm around kids all the time. I'd sooner be safe than sorry.

Its funny you should use that phrase Helen, as thats exactly what vaccinations are providing: herd immunity, by not vaccinating the rest of the herd is put at risk and pregnant women wouldnt have to be making decisions about whether to have the vaccination in pregnancy if the take up of the vaccination programme for children was as good as it should be.

I want to be clear that for me the issue is vaccinating during pregnancy, not vaccination in general, which I think is the absolute right thing to do and vulnerable groups (like very sick children and pregnant women) should be able to rely on people following the programme so they dont need to take risks with their own health due to people who are perfectly able to accept a vaccination without danger not doing so.

It's not even just vaccinating during pregnancy, it's vaccinating during pregnancy in the hope that the vaccination will give the mother immunity so she won't pass on WC to her newborn. Who could possibly catch it elsewhere anyway.

Happy to be corrected if wrong, but from what I've read on this thread, it sounds as if there aren't accurate statistics to prove that the vaccination crosses the placenta to the baby.

(apologies if I'm misunderstood any information from those on here that have knowledge of these things)

This is one of the links I read when making my decision, saw it posted on fb in a birth group im in:

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130402145952/transparency.dh.gov.uk/2012/09/28/jcvi-pertussis/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130402145952/transparency.dh.gov.uk/2012/09/28/jcvi-pertussis/

Greentshirt I'm not a cow and saying things like that of course will make many people feel guilty for choosing to do what they believe is right.

And NO vaccination is 'without danger', none! they all carry a risk, no matter how tiny, and that is undeniable!

Yes. Had it done at 37+5.